Could Twitter and Facebook stop the next terrorist attack?

Tech firms such as Google GOOG, Facebook FB, Twitter TWTR, and Yahoo YHOO are fighting another battle in Washington of late, this time to resist pending legislation that would require them to alert law enforcement of possible terrorist attacks, according to a report from the Associated Press.

The legislation, which has been proposed as a part of a larger intelligence bill, is now under review by the Senate Intelligence Committee. It’s inspired by the fact that terrorist groups such as the so-called Islamic State have increasingly used social media to recruit and disseminate propaganda. Nevertheless, the tech firms feel that the language in the proposed bill is too broad, and “would potentially put companies on the hook legally if they miss a tweet, video or blog that hints of an attack,” the AP said.

The firms have also reportedly said in private meetings that they are already doing their part by banning “grisly content like beheadings and [alerting] law enforcement if they suspect someone might get hurt, as soon as they are aware of a threat.”

President Obama’s free trade blitz is advancing, once again, in the Senate.

A day after Democrats in the chamber united to deny handing him the fast-track negotiating authority he wants to finish a massive Pacific Rim deal, Senate leaders on Wednesday afternoon announced an agreement to move forward on it.

Under the plan, Democrats will get votes on a measure cracking down on currency manipulation and beefing up trade enforcement, and another addressing African trade. But they will not be considered as part of the broader trade package. Democratic demands that the measures be joined together precipitated the meltdown on Tuesday.

The breakthrough, while significant, hardly clears the decks for Obama’s trade agenda, which the administration is pursuing as an economic capstone on his second term. The new framework sets up a debate on Senate passage of the fast-track bill next week. But that timing could slip because the chamber will also be dealing with extending a highway fund and a surveillance law before adjourning for a week-long Memorial Day recess.

Anti-trade forces have worked to slow Senate progress in hope that the debate slips into June, to give the labor and environmental groups more time to rally opposition. And the Senate, a body that’s generally favorable to trade deals, never presented Obama’s stiffest challenge. That will come in the House, where enough conservative Republicans are expected to balk at handing Obama extra authority that Democrats will need to supply the winning margin — a hodgepodge coalition that’s yet to materialize.

Verizon customers can now opt out of tracking program

Verizon customers can now choose to opt-out of a controversial advertising program that used so-called “supercookies,” with the carrier making good on a promise it issued earlier this year. Like more traditional Internet cookies, supercookies track users’ online behavior to serve them up targeted advertisements, but unlike regular cookies, supercookies are impossible for users to delete.

Verizon promised to offer an way for customers to opt-out of the program after privacy and consumer advocates said supercookies were too invasive. Some lawmakers also began questioning Verizon executives over the process.

As the mobile advertising ecosystem evolves, and our advertising business grows, delivering solutions with best-in-class privacy protections remains our focus. As a reminder, we never share information with third parties that identifies our customers as part of our advertising programs.

Customers can opt out of the program, called “Relevant Mobile Advertising,” by visiting Verizon’s website or by calling 1-866-211-0874.

Verizon in January reported quarterly a loss in earnings of $2.15 billion, or 54 centers a share. That’s compared with earnings of $.92 billion, or $1.76 per share a year earlier after changes to its benefits plans. But the company reported revenue was up 6.8% with an increase in subscribers “who pay for services after use,” according to Reuters.

U.S. Senate fails to override Obama’s veto of Keystone XL approval

(REUTERS) — The U.S. Senate failed on Wednesday to override President Barack Obama’s veto of legislation approving the Keystone XL oil pipeline, leaving the controversial project to await an administration decision on whether to permit or deny it.

The Senate mustered just 62 votes in favor of overriding the veto, short of the two-thirds needed. Thirty-seven senators voted to sustain Obama’s veto. The Senate action means the House of Representatives will not vote on override.

Republican Senator John Hoeven said pipeline backers will try again to force Obama’s hand, by attaching Keystone approval to another bill this year.

The TransCanada Corp pipeline would carry 830,000 barrels a day of mostly Canadian oil sands crude to Nebraska en route to refineries and ports along the U.S. Gulf Coast. It has been pending for more than six years.

Republicans support building the pipeline, saying it would create jobs. Obama has questioned Keystone XL’s employment impact and raised concerns about its effects on climate change.

The struggle over whether to build Keystone escalated after Republicans won control of the Senate last year. New Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said pipeline approval would be the first bill the Republican-led Congress would send to Obama.

Obama last month vetoed the bill authorizing the pipeline’s construction, saying it had bypassed a final State Department assessment on whether the project would benefit the United States. The department is handling the approval process because the pipeline would cross the U.S.-Canadian border.

Once that State Department assessment is in, expected in the coming weeks or months, Obama is expected to make a final decision on permitting for the project.

TransCanada said it was not giving up. “We look forward to the conclusion of the review period and having this project approved on its merits,” said spokesman Mark Cooper.

Environmentalists want Obama to reject Keystone because of carbon emissions involved in getting oil out of Canadian tar sands. Democratic Senator Ed Markey called it “the dirtiest oil in the world.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said the project “would produce good, high-paying jobs” and “increase supplies of Canadian and American crude to refiners.”

Most energy drink companies market to minors, report finds

This post is in partnership with Time. The article below was originally published at Time.com

Alexandra Sifferlin, TIME

There’s no denying the energy drink industry is booming, with 60% growth between 2008 to 2012. But a new report from three U.S. senators raises questions about one particular segment of the market that’s growing: minors.

The report, titled “Buzz Kill,” is part of senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.)’s ongoing investigation into the energy drink industry. Their primary concerns are lack of regulation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over the drinks, which may pose health problems for kids, adolescents and teens.

In 2013, the three senators sent letters to 16 energy drink companies asking about their willingness to report any adverse reactions to their products as well as to voluntarily submit to restrictions against marketing to young people. In “Buzz Kills,” the senators report that just four of the 12 companies say they avoid marketing their energy drink to people under 18.

“Unfortunately, as long as early development of brand loyalty is seen as a competitive market advantage, energy drink companies will continue with the practice of marketing to teens in the absence of regulation that prohibits it,” the report reads.

The American Beverage Association has long offered guidance to the beverage industry on labeling, advisory statements, and marketing to children, recommending voluntary statements that the drinks are not recommended for kids and that the products not be promoted at K-12 schools. While several energy drink companies, including Red Bull and Monster, have made a commitment not to market to kids 12 and under, some critics say people over age 12 are still at risk for possible health consequences, like neurodevelopment interactions and heart-related effects.

In response to the report, American Beverage Association spokesperson Christopher Gindlesperger said this, in a statement:

“Energy drinks have been enjoyed safely by millions of people around the world for more than 25 years, and in the U.S. for more than 15 years. Energy drinks, their ingredients and labeling are regulated by the FDA, and, like most consumer products, their advertising is subject to oversight from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission.

This report ignores crucial data about energy drinks and caffeine consumption in the U.S. Based on the most recent government data reported in the journal Pediatrics, children under 12 have virtually no caffeine consumption from energy drinks. This study’s findings are consistent with an analysis commissioned by FDA and updated in 2012, as well as a published ILSI survey of more than 37,000 people which shows that caffeine consumption in the U.S. has remained stable during the most recent period analyzed, while coffee remains the primary source of caffeine in most age groups.

Leading energy drink manufacturers voluntarily go far beyond all federal requirements when it comes to labeling and education. In fact, ABA member companies voluntarily display total caffeine content – from all sources – on their packages along with advisory statements indicating that the product is not recommended for children, pregnant or nursing women and persons sensitive to caffeine. They also have voluntarily pledged not to market these products to children or sell them in K-12 schools.

Based on current regulations, the companies are not breaking rules. An FDA regulatory category for “energy drinks” does not exist, and companies can file their energy drinks to the FDA as either foods or dietary supplements. Some companies do not need to label the amount of caffeine in their products, and others are not required to report adverse health events linked to their products. Given the regulatory confusion, the report authors say the FDA and manufacturers need to make some changes for better transparency.

The senators call on the FDA to set a recommendation for the amount of caffeine a child or adolescent can safely consume each day. They also argue that all energy drink companies should commit to providing adverse-event reports to the FDA, and companies should stop promoting their beverages as “sports drinks.”

Takata warns about ability to fix deadly air bag flaw

(REUTERS) – An executive from Japan’s Takata Corp told U.S. senators on Thursday that the supplier is urgently trying to ramp up replacement parts for millions of vehicles equipped with potentially deadly air bags, but said it may not be able to move quickly enough.

The U.S. auto safety regulator also warned of the risks of moving to a nationwide recall, as senators have urged, saying such a move could divert replacement parts from humid regions where the defective air bags are more likely to rupture upon deployment, shooting metal shards into cars.

At least five fatalities have been linked to the defect so far, mostly in the United States.

The hearing by the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee exposed several blind spots of regulators and the auto industry about the scope and urgency of the air bags’ dangers.

Around 16 million cars with Takata air bags have been recalled worldwide, with more than 10 million of those in theUnited States. But regulators and Takata – which supplies one in five air bags globally – have yet to pinpoint why the parts are at risk.

Hiroshi Shimizu, Takata’s senior vice president for global quality assurance, acknowledged on Thursday that even if the company ramps up production of replacement kits beyond the current pace of 300,000 a month, it may still not have enough parts.

“Even if we increase to 450,000, maybe still that’s not speedy enough,” he said.

David Friedman, deputy administrator of the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, told the committee his agency is in touch with two other suppliers to determine if they are able to make replacement parts.

Friedman came under fire for NHTSA’s allowing automakers to send out notices of “safety campaigns” rather than formal recalls, leaving customers confused over the severity of the problem.

Friedman said his agency would have more control over automakers if Congress passed legislation raising the maximum allowable fine to punish uncooperative automakers, which is currently capped at $35 million.

“We now have a new problem that we are addressing, which is in effect a live hand grenade in front of a driver and a passenger,” said Democratic Senator Bill Nelson, who chaired the hearing, the first to examine the deadly air bag saga that came to light in 2008 and has escalated in recent months.

The hearing held high stakes for Takata, which is facing a criminal probe into the scandal, more than 20 class actions and an NHTSA probe.

When pressed by Republican Senator Dean Heller for Takata to take “full responsibility” for five deaths linked to the air bags, Shimizu consulted a colleague multiple times.

He answered that two of the five fatalities were still under investigation, but acknowledged “anomalies” with Takata air bag parts involved in some fatal accidents. Shimizu said in his prepared comments that Takata was “deeply sorry and anguished about each of the reported instances.”

Rick Schostek, Honda’s North American executive vice president, was also pressed about the slow rollout of recalls that started in 2008. It was only this month that the automaker turned its “safety improvement campaign” into a formal recall.

“I think we acted with urgency, but do I think we could have moved faster in some respects? I absolutely do,” Schostek said.

‘ROOT CAUSES’

Shimizu said the company believes the “root causes” of the air bag inflator ruptures are a combination of the age of the inflator, persistent exposure to high humidity, and problems in production.

The recalls so far have been focused on humid areas. That approach was questioned at a news conference before the hearing, when two U.S. senators linked the air bag defect to a 2003 death in Arizona, which is not considered a humid area.

Charlene Weaver, 24, died in a Takata air bag-related accident while she was a passenger in a 2004 Subaru Impeza in Arizona, her sister, Kim Kopf, said. That car was not recalled until July of this year.

The senators raised the possibility of Weaver’s death as the sixth fatality linked to Takata air bags and the first reported outside of Honda vehicles.

Democratic Senator Ed Markey said the incident shows the need for a nationwide recall. “Every single one of these Takata air bags could be a ticking time bomb,” he said.

NHTSA on Tuesday called on Takata and five automakers to expand their regional recalls of driver-side air bags to cover the entire United States, as senators have urged. But NHTSA’s Friedman acknowledged on Thursday that such a move carries risks.

“At this point, a national recall of all Takata air bags would divert replacement air bags from areas where they are clearly needed, putting lives at risk,” he said.

Senate probe says Goldman, other banks exploited commodity markets

A two-year Senate investigation into Wall Street’s physical commodities business found that U.S. banks had manipulated prices and gained unfair trading advantages at the expense of consumers.

While the detailed report was critical of how banks purchased and exploited huge commodity stockpiles, it did not offer any damning new details on their activities.

Goldman Sachs Group Inc GS, Morgan Stanley MS and J.P. Morgan JPM built huge inventories of aluminum, oil, jet fuel and other commodities, the report said, and failed to properly insulate themselves from large, potential losses stemming from the stockpiles.

The report, based on 90,000 pages of bank and regulatory documents as well as 78 interviews and briefings, stems from a probe by the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee On Investigations that began in 2012 and focused on Wall Street’s involvement in the physical commodities industry.

“We found substantial evidence that these activities expose major banks to catastrophic risks … that could result in losses that exceed bank capital reserves and insurance coverage and thereby threaten the stability of the financial system,” committee Chair Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, said at a news briefing.

According to a previously unpublished 2012 analysis by the Federal Reserve Commodities Team, the report said, four major financial holding companies – including the three highlighted in the Senate report – had allocated an inadequate amount of capital and insurance to cover “extreme loss scenarios.”

“Each had a shortfall of $1 billion to $15 billion,” it said.

The 403-page document, which comes in the final weeks of Levin’s role as chairman of the committee, stresses the need to separate banking from commerce and to prohibit the exploitation of commodity prices.

While the report sheds some new light on the size, impact and risks associated with the three banks’ commodities arms, it does not contain any major bombshells or smoking guns.

It also points the finger at the Federal Reserve, saying the central bank has taken insufficient steps to address the risks taken by financial holding companies gathering physical commodities. The Fed in some cases was unaware of the growing risk, the report said.

For instance, Fed personnel told the committee that the nation’s banking regulator had been unaware that Morgan Stanley was working on a pioneering project to export compressed natural gas from a Texas port until a media report in August 2014, when Reuters first wrote about the novel plan.

Morgan Stanley officials told the committee that they provided an “initial, oral notice” to the New York Fed in November 2013.

Merry-go-round
The impact of banks on commodity prices seized the spotlight in July 2013 when the New York Times detailed what it called a “merry-go-round of metal” involving the movement of aluminum between warehouses by Metro International Trade Services – a Goldman Sachs subsidiary – as a way to exploit London Metal Exchange (LME) pricing regulations.

Metro soon became the center of controversy after big consumers such as MillerCoors LLC and Coca-Cola Co accused warehouses and their owners of exploiting the LME storage rules to boost rental income, distort supplies and inflate physical prices of aluminum.

The Senate report released on Wednesday supported the claim that Metro took advantage of pricing rules and created long queues of aluminum, which in turn drove up its market value.

The committee probe found that a major reason why it took longer to move aluminum out of Metro’s Detroit warehouse operation was a number of large warrant cancellations by a small group of financial institutions, including Deutsche Bank, London hedge fund Red Kite, commodities trader Glencore, J.P. Morgan and Goldman.

Senior bankers from Goldman, J.P. Morgan and Morgan Stanley will appear as part of a two-day committee hearing on the issue starting on Thursday.

Bank response
Goldman on Wednesday said in a fact sheet that it did not engage in improper “merry go round” transactions. The bank said the Times’ July 2013 article suggests the movement of aluminum between warehouses caused the metal to be less available or more expensive.

“This is simply false,” Goldman said in the document. “Metro always complied with owners’ instructions as to the movement of metal, its activities complied with LME rules and did not impact the cost that Americans pay for cans of beer.”

Goldman is in the process of selling Metro, though details of bidders and timing remain unclear. Unlike many of its rivals, Goldman has maintained that commodities is core to its business.

J.P. Morgan, also on Wednesday, said in a fact sheet that it operates its commodities business in conformity with applicable rules. The committee report was critical of J.P. Morgan for a large transaction involving its copper holdings, saying it exceeded a federal rule that limits banks to settling no more than 5 percent of their derivative transactions by taking physical delivery of commodities.

The bank acknowledged that a large client-initiated trade did exceed the limit in 2011.

“This is the only time that J.P. Morgan has exceeded the OCC limit in the roughly 20 years it has been in place,” the bank said, referring to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

As for Morgan Stanley, the report takes aim at the large inventories of oil, natural gas and jet fuel that the bank amassed.

“Morgan Stanley is proud of its comprehensive approach to risk management, which has enabled the firm to manage its commodities business prudently and effectively over the last three decades,” the bank said in a statement.

The report, based on interviews with Metro and Goldman executives, contains for the first time details of six “merry-go-round” transactions involving 600,000 tonnes in which existing customers agreed to either join or keep their metal in a queue.

The 400-page report by the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee On Investigations exposes details of complex transactions that explain for the first time how Metro went to huge efforts to maintain long wait times in Detroit to boost income.

The potentially explosive report offers the clearest glimpse yet into the complex strategy that created long queues, and it is likely to reignite a years-long debate on how the ownership of warehouses has transformed the metals market.

Aluminum has been in the spotlight for years after the appearance of long wait times in Detroit, where Metro is headquartered and millions of tonnes of aluminum have been stockpiled, shortly after Goldman bought Metro in February 2010.

How or who behind the queues was the center of much market speculation over the years, but not until now ever known.

In the first board meeting following the acquisition by Goldman, Metro executives and its board of directors made a strategic decision to market for the first time incentives to customers with metal already stored in warehouses, Metro Chief Executive Chris Wibbelman told the subcommittee, the report said.

The fact that Goldman engaged in extensive aluminum trading at the same time it was approving practices leading to a long warehouse queue has given rise to serious questions about the integrity of the aluminum market, the report said.

INCENTIVES

Most of these deals involved Metro paying incentives for a financial firm to cancel contracts on metal held in Metro’s warehouses; join the queue to exit; and upon reaching the head of the queue, load out the metal from one warehouse and return it into another nearby. Later, the customer would return the aluminum for storage again.

These merry-go-round deals resulted not only in Metro retaining metal inside its system, but lengthened the queue, essentially blocking other metal owners from exiting Metro warehouses, the report said.

Warehouses have often paid incentives to lure new metal into their sheds, but this was the first time transactions involving metal going back into warehouses have been made known.

The strategy started shortly after Goldman bought the company when Metro became concerned owners of metal were removing metal to store elsewhere, leading to a loss of revenue.

In September 2010, DB Energy Trading, a unit of the German bank, agreed the first merry-go-round deal, involving 100,000 tonnes of aluminum, most of which was loaded out of one warehouse and into another.

Deutsche Bank and Metro confirmed the existence of transaction, but said there was never any contract.

The impact was immediate: the wait time to get metal on Sept. 15, 2010, was 20 days. A week later, on Sept. 22, a few days after Deutsche canceled the warrants, Detroit had a queue of nearly 120.

By the end of December 2012, the wait to get aluminum out of the Detroit warehouse system was approaching 500 days, with the increase largely attributable to warrant cancellations by JPMorgan, Red Kite, and Goldman, the report said.

Republicans block overhaul of NSA surveillance reform

(REUTERS) – A bill to end the National Security Agency’s bulk collection of telephone records failed on a procedural vote in the U.S. Senate on Tuesday after senior Republicans said it would benefit enemies of the United States, including Islamic State militants.

The “USA Freedom Act” was supported by an unusual coalition of Democrats and conservative Republicans concerned about Americans’ privacy, but failed 58 to 42, falling short of the 60 votes needed to move ahead.

The measure is unlikely to become law anytime soon, as Republicans will hold a majority of seats in the Senate after Jan. 1.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, the future Senate Majority Leader, came out strongly against the bill in a Senate speech on Tuesday morning, concerns matched by several hawkish Republicans including former government officials.

“If our aim is to degrade and destroy ISIL, as the president has said, then that’s going to require smart policies and firm determination. At a minimum, we shouldn’t be doing anything to make the situation worse,” McConnell said.

The legislation was the first considered by the full Senate that addressed privacy concerns raised last year after revelations by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden showing U.S. intelligence was collecting and storing communications metadata, such as the records of millions of Americans’ telephone calls.

Among other things, the bill would have required the NSA to ask a communications company for records of a specific person when investigating a terrorism case, rather than indiscriminately sweeping up records.

The House of Representatives passed a similar, but less restrictive, version of the bill earlier this year. The White House had supported the legislation, denying assertions that it would benefit terrorist groups.

The measure is not likely to be taken up again anytime soon. Republican successes in elections on Nov. 4 gave the party control of a majority of seats in the Senate and a larger majority in the House starting in January.

Many U.S. technology companies also sought the changes after seeing their business suffer as foreign governments worried data might be handed over to American intelligence.

A group of them, including AOL Inc, Apple Inc , Facebook Inc, Google Inc, Microsoft Corp, Twitter Inc and Yahoo Inc, had sent a letter urging the Senate to pass the bill.

The bill’s backers vowed not to give up. “I will continue to fight to preserve our constitution and our rights as Americans,” said Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, the bill’s lead sponsor, after its defeat.

Keystone pipeline measure fails in Senate by one vote

Senators narrowly rejected a bill Tuesday that would have authorized the Keystone XL pipeline, the controversial spigot for transporting Canadian oil to the Gulf Coast.

The final vote – 59-41 – fell one vote shy of what was necessary to pass the legislation. All 45 Republicans gave their support for the pipeline’s construction, while 14 Democrats also voted in favor.

The failure hurt the re-election prospects of Sen. Mary Landrieu, of Louisiana, in a Dec. 6 run-off against opponent Rep. Bill Cassidy, a Republican. Landrieu, a Democrat, sponsored the bill and pushed hard for its passage.

On Friday, the House passed the measure 252-161, including 31 Democrats who voted for its approval.

The pipeline, as conceived, would stretch over 1,000 miles and carry up to 800,000 barrels of crude oil daily from the Canadian tar sands to the Gulf Coast. Advocates of the pipeline argued that its construction would create jobs and help reduce U.S. dependency on Middle East oil while opponents said it would harm the environment.

Although the bill failed to pass on Tuesday, the Senate may take up the issue again in January when Republicans gain control. Future Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said he is committed to another vote on the measure.